Guys,

From the outside it just looks like a couple of spoiled kids battling in the kindergarten.

All of this is not moving Smalltalk and Pharo any single bit forward. Backwards, there is a fair chance. Now, could you take this discussion elsewhere? Pick up a phone and talk. Who cares if anyone is right? Oh yeah, EUR 4K, what a huge amount to fight over for an European org... (rolleyes). Phil On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Luc Fabresse <luc.fabresse@gmail.com>wrote:

Hi Janko,

I do not have all numbers at hand now but in 2013 there were 4 extra-GSOC but we paid only 3 because one student gave up (Jean-Baptiste Beuzelin). So yes you are probably right that it remains money if we integrate last year BUT we were willing to spend it.

Luc

2014-02-09 Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si>:

...

Dear all,

First to Luc: from your numbers it is clear that you are not to be blamed on anything, because you were obviously misinformed and misguided.

Facts namely are:

1. GSoC mentors decided to pay extra stipendiums 3000 USD [1] while ESUG without approval paid 2000 more, 5000 USD, without any report back to GSoC mentors,

2. GSoC mentors decided to add past GSoC2012 amount to the pool for paying extra projects [2][3].

Calculation (without the Summit expenses) therefore is:

Income: GSoC 2012 13x 500 = 6.500 USD GSoC 2013 13x 500 = 6.500 USD ------------------------------ 13.000 USD

Expenses: Extra stipendiums: 3x 3.000 = 9.000 USD

Difference: + 4.000 USD

If ESUG would follow the decisions of GSoC mentors it wouldn't loose any money but gain 4.000 USD.

Those that misinformed and misguided you needs therefore to apologize to you Luc, to the GSoC mentors and to me as admin!

Janko

[1] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/Yrlj8dIgGPg [2] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/WwnxpkXzAB8 [3] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/tR44jdPT5Hw

Dne 09. 02. 2014 17:26, piše Luc Fabresse:

...

Hi all,

------------ FACTS

As you all know, I am the ESUG treasurer. So please find the numbers attached for the ESUG support of GSOC projects in 2013.

ESUG sponsored 3 "extra-GSOC" meaning extra slots not accepted by Google. In the file it is: Alejandro Infante, Pablo Estefo and Benjamin Arezki.

All in all we paid: - 3695EUR (~5000USD at that time i.e. same cost as a regular GSOC) each projects - Serge trip to Mentor summit

And we received 5552EUR from Google

so yes we lost ~6582EUR That is easy 13*500 USD would only cover 1 plain extra-Gsoc and we sponsorized 3.

I also think that it is important to send someone to the GSoc mentor summit because it participates to the fact that Google recognizes ESUG ang gives slots the next year.

It is alos important to note dates. ESUG paid first and then has been refund by Google. It would not be possible to do it without ESUG.

------------ FROM HERE, MY POINT OF VIEW ON THIS STORY:

As some of you know, I doing the ESUG treasury stuff on my *own* time and it takes a lot! I am doing it because I strongly believe that Smalltalk (all falvors!) is a really great language that should be more widespread.

I also completely open to discussions. The ESUG board can also explain its actions and even money status. I can do errors too. So if Janko wants some details on GSOC related money, JUST ASK!

I cannot admit that:

- Janko wrote about some money accusation. This is directly directed against the treasurer so me. And honestly, just reading again that I am biased and that I hide or steal money make me think that I should better quit.

- Janko asked for apologies! what is that? even if I would have done a mistake (and ESUG did not loose money), YOU STILL MUST THANK ME for DOING THIS BORING TASK! and then I can correct mistakes if any

- People wants an answer fast, this conversation started yesterday and I am spending my week-end with my kids

I am really fed up with this kind of attitude. Stop accuse, better ask, discuss and we will solve the problems together if any. But I think it will never happen...

#Luc The disgusted Treasurer of ESUG who will finish his week-end in bad mood

-- Janko Mivšek Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team

Janko,

From what I know from good business practices is that what helps in keeping things in order is good financial management and transparency.

So, the general ledger should be made accessible so things are clear on that front. For the Google story, upfront payment by ESUG while waiting for Google money should have been registered with postings that reflected that (like with an account on "expected revenue from Google") and balanced against it. If one would spend money beyond the credit limits, there would be an issue. So, escalation should be taking place to decide. There seems to be a board, and the board ultimately decides on that front. Which it apparently did. Whoever is not happy with that decision will at one point accept it as this is the top decision point. Or start a revolution, split, or whatever. There are always things going on behind the curtain. Politics is a fact of life. I you have a personal gripe with some members, you put the dead rat on the table. Now is it time time speak up about who/what/why and discuss that with them. Now, the Smalltalk community appears to be fragmented, and the Pharo|Squeak technology, even if very cool, is currently not helping me much on the revenue making front. My bottom line isn't booking more that EUR 15K on Pharo related sales. Not that I am not pushing. I'd love to be putting decent bread on the table through Pharo. FWIW, when it comes to current trends like Internet of Things, BigData [Hadoop stuff], and Mobile, Smalltalk is at ground zero given the ecosystem. So, fighting internally like that isn't getting us forward while everything is swooshing past. Phil On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si>wrote:

Phil,

This matter is actually very important for Smalltalk community, because it exposes nontransparent, meddling behind the scenes, and in some cases blatantly unethical behavior of some ESUG board members. Which is certainly bad for our community on long term.

Such matters need to be clarified and some conclusions to be made for a community to preserve health and go on. Otherwise you are drowning into murky waters more and more.

Best regards Janko

Dne 10. 02. 2014 09:12, piše phil@highoctane.be:

...

Guys,

From the outside it just looks like a couple of spoiled kids battling in the kindergarten.

All of this is not moving Smalltalk and Pharo any single bit forward. Backwards, there is a fair chance.

Now, could you take this discussion elsewhere? Pick up a phone and talk.

Who cares if anyone is right? Oh yeah, EUR 4K, what a huge amount to fight over for an European org... (rolleyes).

Phil

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Luc Fabresse <luc.fabresse@gmail.com <mailto:luc.fabresse@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi Janko,

I do not have all numbers at hand now but in 2013 there were 4 extra-GSOC but we paid only 3 because one student gave up (Jean-Baptiste Beuzelin). So yes you are probably right that it remains money if we integrate last year BUT we were willing to spend it.

Luc

2014-02-09 Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si <mailto:janko.mivsek@eranova.si>>:

Dear all,

First to Luc: from your numbers it is clear that you are not to be blamed on anything, because you were obviously misinformed and misguided.

Facts namely are:

1. GSoC mentors decided to pay extra stipendiums 3000 USD [1] while ESUG without approval paid 2000 more, 5000 USD, without any report back to GSoC mentors,

2. GSoC mentors decided to add past GSoC2012 amount to the pool for paying extra projects [2][3].

Calculation (without the Summit expenses) therefore is:

Income: GSoC 2012 13x 500 = 6.500 USD GSoC 2013 13x 500 = 6.500 USD ------------------------------ 13.000 USD

Expenses: Extra stipendiums: 3x 3.000 = 9.000 USD

Difference: + 4.000 USD

If ESUG would follow the decisions of GSoC mentors it wouldn't loose any money but gain 4.000 USD.

Those that misinformed and misguided you needs therefore to apologize to you Luc, to the GSoC mentors and to me as admin!

Janko

[1]

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/Yrlj8dIgGPg

...

[2]

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/WwnxpkXzAB8

...

[3]

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/tR44jdPT5Hw

...

Dne 09. 02. 2014 17:26, piše Luc Fabresse: > Hi all, > > ------------ > FACTS > > As you all know, I am the ESUG treasurer. > So please find the numbers attached for the ESUG support of

GSOC

...

> projects in 2013. > > ESUG sponsored 3 "extra-GSOC" meaning extra slots not accepted by Google. > In the file it is: Alejandro Infante, Pablo Estefo and Benjamin Arezki. > > All in all we paid: > - 3695EUR (~5000USD at that time i.e. same cost as a regular GSOC) each > projects > - Serge trip to Mentor summit > > And we received 5552EUR from Google > > so yes we lost ~6582EUR > That is easy 13*500 USD would only cover 1 plain extra-Gsoc

and we

...

> sponsorized 3. > > I also think that it is important to send someone to the GSoc mentor > summit because it participates to the fact that Google recognizes ESUG > ang gives slots the next year. > > It is alos important to note dates. > ESUG paid first and then has been refund by Google. > It would not be possible to do it without ESUG. > > ------------ > FROM HERE, MY POINT OF VIEW ON THIS STORY: > > As some of you know, I doing the ESUG treasury stuff on my *own* time > and it takes a lot! > I am doing it because I strongly believe that Smalltalk (all falvors!) > is a really great language that should be more widespread. > > I also completely open to discussions. > The ESUG board can also explain its actions and even money

status.

...

> I can do errors too. > So if Janko wants some details on GSOC related money, JUST ASK! > > I cannot admit that: > > - Janko wrote about some money accusation. This is directly directed > against the treasurer so me. > And honestly, just reading again that I am biased and that I hide or > steal money make me think that I should better quit. > > - Janko asked for apologies! what is that? even if I would have done a > mistake (and ESUG did not loose money), YOU STILL MUST THANK ME for > DOING THIS BORING TASK! and then I can correct mistakes if any > > - People wants an answer fast, this conversation started yesterday and I > am spending my week-end with my kids > > > I am really fed up with this kind of attitude. > Stop accuse, better ask, discuss and we will solve the problems together > if any. > But I think it will never happen... > > #Luc > The disgusted Treasurer of ESUG who will finish his week-end in bad mood >

-- Janko Mivšek Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team

-- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565

Hi Damien, First, I do not insult anyone and certainly praise the ESUG and you guys for all work you are doing. On the other side I cannot go over bad things happening like this one. Unacceptable behavior must be exposed and treated accordingly, as I said this is needed for any community to stay healthy long-term.

ESUG might have done a mistake giving 5000€ to the students and not the amount that people voted for. I should have paid more attention to that and I apologize. That's all I will apologize for.

Thanks for your apologize, it is appreciated. Still I think we deserve an apologize from those who spreaded privately and publicly the 'we lost money' claim.

Now, I want to have details about your message. What do you mean by "blatantly unethical behavior"? At which point have we been unethical?

This is story from GSoC 2010, a first GSoC I run as admin. Because it is so blatant, I give to the main actor a first word, then I'll explain and put on table my side of the story and arguments. In any case, this story is main reason that I started then already pushing Smalltalk GSoC to be as independent as possible, with current rename to Smalltalk proposal as a culmination. Best regards Janko Dne 10. 02. 2014 10:40, piše Damien Cassou:

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si> wrote:

...

This matter is actually very important for Smalltalk community, because it exposes nontransparent, meddling behind the scenes, and in some cases blatantly unethical behavior of some ESUG board members.

I thank you for your efforts running the GSoC marathon every year.

Nevertheless, as a member of the board I feel insulted again by you Janko. I'm tired spending hours doing work for everyone and get such a message as an answer

Now, I want to have details about your message. What do you mean by "blatantly unethical behavior"? At which point have we been unethical?

Last time we talked about the representation of the Smalltalk community in the ESUG board, I asked people from other communities to apply and come work with us (http://lists.esug.org/pipermail/esug-list_lists.esug.org/2012-July/001849.ht...). Nobody applied! I will ask again, thanks for the remainder. Who is going to take care of ESUG if we focus on taking care of Pharo?

Please stop insulting people. If you want to stop organizing the GSoC for the Smalltalk community just say it clearly and we will all thank you for the effort you have put in during this last years. But if you want to continue, please do it with ESUG as this is what the ESUG community seems to want if I analyse the answers you got to the recent threads.